The following academic policy statement was recommended by the Academic
Senate on May 11, 1995 and received the concurrence of the President
on May 31, 1995. This policy statement supersedes PS 77-09.

I. STATEMENT OF GOVERNING PRINCIPLES

A. A graduate student may only file a grievance based on an alleged
violation of specific University regulations or policies or accepted
principles of due process and only if another specified remedy (such
as the University Grade Appeal Policy in the case of all course
grades) does not exist.
B. A grievance may not be filed on the basis of a graduate student's
judgment of an instructor's or administrator's competence; such
judgments are solely the province of the academic department involved
or of the administrator's supervisor.
C. A grievance must be initiated within one calendar year of the
alleged violation.
D. Graduate programs should make every effort to obviate the possible
causes of a grievance in advance by developing clearly written statements
of procedures and standards governing decisions that affect graduate
students, such as admission into a program, dismissal from a program,
administration of comprehensive examinations, selection for field
experience, et cetera. Graduate programs should also have in place
a mechanism, such as an appeals committee, to provide due process
review at the local level when a graduate student so requests. Due
process review is an evaluation of the procedures and standards
followed in arriving at a decision; it should be conducted by qualified
members of the faculty who were not involved in making the original
decision. The purpose is not to second-guess the original decision,
but rather to make certain that the appropriate procedures and standards
were applied in a manner free of arbitrary, prejudicial, or capricious
behavior.
E. Final decisions affecting graduate students should be made only
on substantive grounds by the personnel who are most qualified professionally,
namely the faculty offering a particular graduate program. When
subsequent review shows that appropriate procedures or standards
have not been followed in arriving at a decision affecting a graduate
student, the preferred remedy is to remand the case back to the
faculty of the graduate program for their reconsideration. An error
in procedure should not become grounds for reversing a substantive
decision. In the event that the faculty of a graduate program persist
in a failure to follow appropriate procedures or standards, the
Graduate Council will consider that situation as an indication that
the program should be reviewed for suspension or discontinuance.

II. INFORMAL RESOLUTION

A formal grievance may be filed by a graduate student only after
the student has first sought to resolve the grievance by informal
means. The graduate student should begin by contacting the chair
or director of the program offering the degree, explaining the nature
of the perceived problem, and requesting reconsideration of the
decision. If the chair or director was directly involved in the
original decision or denies the student an opportunity for due process
review at the local level, then the student should seek informal
resolution through the college's Associate Dean for Graduate Studies.

III. FORMAL RESOLUTION

A. If an attempt at informal resolution is unsuccessful, a graduate
student may file a formal grievance with the Associate Vice President
for Academic Affairs and Dean of Graduate Studies. The grievance
must be filed in writing within 30 calendar days of the time when
informal resolution was unsuccessful. The grievance must include
a full statement of the graduate student's evidence that a University
regulation or policy or an accepted principle of due process was
violated, as well as an explanation of the efforts made to seek
informal resolution. The Associate Vice President for Academic Affairs
and Dean of Graduate Studies will verify that a good-faith effort
at informal resolution was attempted by the graduate student and
that no more than one year has elapsed since the alleged violation
occurred.
B. If these conditions have been satisfied, the Associate Vice President
for Academic Affairs and Dean of Graduate Studies will forward the
grievance to the Steering Committee of the Graduate Council.

1. If a member of the Steering Committee is a faculty member of
the graduate program involved in the grievance, that member of the
Steering Committee shall be replaced by another member of the Graduate
Council, elected for that purpose, whenever the committee considers
any matter related to the grievance.
2. The Steering Committee will forward a copy of the grievance to
the chair or director of the graduate program, requesting that a
written response be submitted to the committee within 20 working
days of receipt of the grievance.

C. When the Steering Committee receives the written response to
the grievance, it will determine whether there is sufficient evidence
to render a summary judgment or whether the grievance merits further
review. The Steering Committee may decide:

1. That there is not sufficient evidence of a violation of a University
regulation or policy or an accepted principle of due process and
dismiss the grievance; such a decision shall be final, unless further
review is granted by the President.
2. That there is sufficient evidence of a violation of a University
regulation or policy or an accepted principle of due process to
warrant immediate remanding of the grievance to the graduate program,
with explicit instructions concerning the violation that must be
corrected during the graduate program's reconsideration of the case.
3. That the evidence in the case is such that further review is
required; in such an instance the Steering Committee shall notify
both the grievant and the graduate program in writing of the additional
evidence the committee wishes to see and whether that evidence should
be provided in writing or in personal testimony before the committee.

D. If the Steering Committee seeks evidence by means of personal
testimony, the meeting at which such testimony is presented shall
be conducted in the manner of any other academic committee meeting
and not as a formal hearing; both the grievant and the graduate
program shall be given appropriate opportunities to present their
views, but the meeting shall be conducted as an inquiry by the committee
members, and not as an adversarial proceeding; there shall be no
cross-examination.
E. All meetings at which the Steering Committee considers a grievance
shall be closed to the public; the committee shall keep minutes
of the meeting, but it need not tape-record its proceedings, nor
shall a transcript be prepared.
F. When the Steering Committee is satisfied that it has obtained
sufficient evidence to make a determination in the case, it shall
make its decision in accordance with the provisions of Paragraph
III.C.1 or III.C.2 above.
G. The Steering Committee shall report to the Graduate Council on
the issues involved in the grievance and on its determination of
the case, without identifying the graduate student who filed the
grievance.